Musings, leadership tidbits and quotes posted by a retired Navy Captain (really just a high performing 2nd Class Petty Officer) who hung up his uniform a bit too early. He still wears his Navy service on his sleeve. He needs to get over that. "ADVANCE WARNING - NO ORIGINAL THOUGHT!" A "self-appointed" lead EVANGELIST for the "cryptologic community". Keeping CRYPTOLOGY alive-one day and Sailor at a time. 2015 is 80th Anniversary of the Naval Security Group.

Thursday, June 30, 2011

Rear Admiral William E. Leigher

Director of Concepts, Strategies and Integration for Information Dominance, N2/N6F

Rear Admiral Bill Leigher, a native of Appleton, Maine, graduated from the University of Southern Maine in 1980 with a Bachelor in Political Science degree. He attended the Naval War College, graduating in 1994 with a Master in National Security and Strategic Studies.

In 1981, he was commissioned as an ensign at Officer Candidate School, Newport, R.I. His initial assignment was aboard USS Thorn (DD 988) as a communications officer. In 1984, he reported to the Surface Warfare Officers School in Newport, R.I., as the fleet communications instructor.

In 1987, he was selected for lateral transfer and designated a naval cryptologic officer. Later in 1987, Leigher was assigned to U.S. Naval Security Group Activity Hanza, Okinawa, Japan, as morse and non-morse division officer. In 1990, he was assigned as the staff cryptologist for commander, Cruiser-Destroyer Group 2 in Charleston, S.C. During this tour he completed two deployments embarked in USS America (CV 66), which included combat action during Operations Desert Storm, Desert Shield and Southern Watch. In 1992, Leigher was assigned to the Office of Naval Intelligence Detachment, Newport, R.I., as a war-gaming specialist.

In 1995, Leigher was assigned to COMUSNAVEUR in London, England, as the cryptologic operations officer. In 1998, he reported to commander, Naval Security Group Command, Fort Meade, Md., for assignment as deputy director for Information Technology and Communications and was subsequently assigned to the Pentagon as the executive assistant to the deputy director for Cryptology. In 2002 he reported to the National Security Agency as a senior operations officer in the National Security Operations Center. In July 2004 he reported as the deputy director for Information Operations at Naval Network Warfare Command.

He served as director, Information Operations, Washington, D.C. on the staff of the Chief of Naval Operations until December 2009. Most recently, he served as the Deputy Commander, Fleet Cyber Command/TENTH Fleet from December 2009 to June 2011. He reported to his current OPNAV assignment in July 2011.

Leigher wears the Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit, the Meritorious Service Medal (three awards), the Navy Commendation Medal (three awards), the Navy Achievement Medal (two awards) and various unit and campaign medals.

The Chief of Naval Operations appreciates the contributions to winning of the war made by the officers and enlisted men, who, under hazardous conditions, manned our Combat Information Centers afloat and ashore. The tactical employment of radar and associated equipments, both offensively and defensively, gave our Fleet a telling advantage over the enemy. To those who waged our electronic warfare so loyally and effectively, "Well done".

Wednesday, June 29, 2011

A major U.S. Army survey of leadership and morale found that more than 80 percent of Army officers and sergeants had directly observed a “toxic” leader in the last year and that about 20 percent of the respondents said that they had worked directly for one.

The Army defined toxic leaders as commanders who put their own needs first, micro-managed subordinates, behaved in a mean-spirited manner or displayed poor decision making. About half of the soldiers who worked under toxic leaders expected that their selfish and abusive commanders would be promoted to a higher level of leadership.

The survey also found that 97 percent of officers and sergeants had observed an “exceptional leader” within the Army in the past year.

“This may create a self-perpetuating cycle with harmful and long-lasting effects on morale, productivity and retention of quality personnel,” the survey concluded. “There is no indication that the toxic leadership issue will correct itself.”

“We are looking at the command selection process asking how can we introduce 360-degree evaluations,” General Martin Dempsey (the next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) said in a meeting with reporters this spring. “We can ask a battalion commander, does the senior commander [over him] engender a climate of trust.” Such an approach could help weed out toxic leaders.

You have a pretty good idea that you are on the right leadership track when your peers nominate you for the prestigious VADM James Bond Stockdale Inspirational Leadership Award. RADM Bruce Grooms is such a man. Back in 1999, as a commander, Bruce Grooms was Commanding Officer of the nuclear powered fast attack submarine USS ASHEVILLE (SSN-758) when he was selected as winner of the VADM James Bond Stockdale Inspirational Leadership Award. At the time, my Shipmate and sometimes mentor, RADM Al Konetzni said "CDR Grooms is a top-notch performer and an ideal leader." RADM Al Konetzni, Jr. was Commander Submarine Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet at the time. "He's the best of the best and I couldn't be happier for him and his great crew." I wrote more about RADM Grooms HERE in September 2009.

This award was established in honor of VADM James Bond Stockdale, whose distinguished Naval career symbolized the highest standards of excellence in both personal example and leadership. The award is presented annually to two commissioned officers on active duty below the grade of captain who are in command of a ship, submarine, or aviation squadron at the time of nomination. Candidates are nominated by peers who themselves must be eligible for the award. More about RADM Grooms below.

PLEASE NOTE: MORE THAN A COUPLE OF OUR CNO'S HAVE EARNED THE PRIVILEGE OF BEING RECOGNIZED BY THEIR PEERS WITH THE VADM JAMES BOND STOCKDALE AWARD.

Rear Admiral Bruce Estes Grooms

Assistant Deputy, Operations, Plans and Strategy (N3/N5B)

Rear Admiral Grooms, a native of Cleveland, Ohio, graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy with a Bachelor of Science degree in Aerospace Engineering.

Following completion of nuclear power training, he served in nearly every capacity aboard a variety of submarines including a tour as executive officer of USS Pasadena (SSN 752) where he twice deployed to the Persian Gulf.

His command tours include service as commanding officer of USS Asheville (SSN 758). During this tour the ship received the Battle Efficiency E award, the Golden Anchor and Silver Anchor for the highest retention in the Submarine Force. Asheville twice earned the Engineering Excellence E award, won the Fleet Recreational Award for best quality of life programs, and twice won the Submarine Squadron 3 Commodore’s Cup. Grooms subsequently served as commander, Submarine Squadron 6 and later as Commander, Submarine Group 2.

Ashore he served as a company officer and later as the commandant of midshipmen at the United States Naval Academy. He served as the senior military assistant to the under secretary of Defense for Policy. He was the senior inspector for the Nuclear Propulsion Examining Board. He served as deputy director then director, Submarine Warfare Division (N87) and as vice director, Joint Staff. Currently, he is serving on the chief of naval operations’ staff as assistant deputy, Operations, Plans and Strategy.

Grooms was selected as the Vice Admiral Stockdale Inspirational Leadership Award winner for 1999. He earned a master’s degree in National Security and Strategic Studies from the Naval War College, graduating with distinction and attended Stanford University as a National Security Affairs Fellow.

He has been awarded the Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit and various campaign and unit awards.

Sunday, June 26, 2011

Your team hates you. Really. They do. They hate you but they just won’t say so because they know better. The Navy has taught them to bite their tongue and to grin and bear it until either you or they transfer. But when they go home at night, they spill their bile about their taskmaster of a boss who does nothing but drive them crazy (isn’t that what you do too?).

10 Reasons Your Team Hates You:

10. You don’t prioritize. Everything is important. When you do this, you remove your team’s ability to say no to less important work and focus their efforts on critical tasks.

9. You treat them like employees. You don’t know a darn thing about them as a person (which makes them feel like nothing more than a number).

8. You don’t fight for them. When is the last time you went to bat for a team member? And I mean went to bat where you had something to lose if it didn’t work out? When you don’t stand up for them, you lose their trust.

7. You tell them to “have a balanced life” then set a bad example. You tell them weekends are precious and they should spend them with their family then you go and send them emails or voice mails on Sunday afternoon.

6. You never relax. You walk around like you have a potato chip wedged between your butt cheeks and you’re trying not to break it. When you’re uptight all the time, it makes them uptight. Negative or stressful energy transfers to others.

5. You micromanage. You know every detail of what they’re working on and you’ve become a control freak. They have no room to make decisions on their own (which means yes, they’ll make a mistake or two).

4. You’re a suck-up. If your boss stopped short while walking down the hall, you’d break your neck. Your team hates seeing you do this because it demonstrates lack of spine and willingness to fight for them. It can also signal to them that you expect them to be a sycophant just like you.

3. You treat them like mushrooms. Translation: they’re kept in the dark and fed a bunch of crap. Do you ration information? Do you withhold “important” things from them because it’s “need to know” only? All you’re doing is creating gossip and fear.

2. You’re above getting your hands dirty. You’re great at assigning work. Doing work? Not so much. They hate watching you preside (and they hate it even more when you take credit for what they slaved over).

1. You’re indecisive. Maybe. Or not. But possibly. Yeah. No. I don’t know. OH MY GOSH MAKE A DECISION ALREADY! That’s what you get paid to do as the leader. You drive them crazy with your incessant flip-flopping or waffling (mmmm waffles… oh. Sorry… still writing).

Saturday, June 25, 2011

The qualities of Admiral Chester Nimitz's character were apparent in his face, in his career, and in his heritage; combined, these factors made him precisely the man he was and placed him in this particular situation at this moment in history.

He was not a cold man, or a bad tempered man — quite the contrary — to the world he presented a figure of almost total complacency; he seldom lost his temper or raised his voice.

It could be said that Admiral Ernest King was a driver who knew how to lead; it could also be said that Nimitz was a leader who conquered any personal urge to drive, and achieved his ends more by persuasion and inspiration to men under his command.

Friday, June 24, 2011

Officers do need to be able to be decisive. They need to be decisive, however, when the circumstances warrant it. In battle, in emergencies and in certain situations where people are being put under pressure thenecessity for decisive action is readily apparent.

On other occasions being decisive, where being decisive means making a swift decision, is the very opposite of what is needed. A process of slow and thorough consultation and thought may be more appropriate to the situation. If the officer tries to 'be decisive' in these sorts of circumstances he may end up failing to get commitment from his team, may overlook problems and solutions to those problems, may fail to take the best or the most creative decision and will certainly fail to attain the objective or goal.

The officer also needs to be flexible in decision making. That will involve being ready to change or alter a decision that has been taken. It will also involve, on some occasions, hardly taking 'a decision' at all but deciding merely to proceed until options and paths become clearer.

Being a decisive officer is important. But being decisive is appropriate only in certain situations. Far more important than being decisive alone is the ability to know when to be decisive in its classical sense and when to take decisions in a less 'decisive' way. Training will be needed for officers to develop the different types of decision making.

Being unwilling to express themselves in a decided manner at a conference at which senior officers are present, a point may sometimes be missed which only the junior can expound. A junior intelligence officer may be the only person present who has a deep knowledge of a subject, the intelligence sources, their validity and security screen.

He must, therefore, not only have his wits about him and know what to say, but be able to say it in a forthright manner, unawed by the multiplicity of stripes which surround him. He must press his point of view, secure in the knowledge that, if he does so, he will invariably have the support and sympathy of the chairman, and in fact of the whole gathering who admire nothing so much as a junior officer with something to say, and the guts to say it in a convincing way.

Recent history is peppered with occasions when wishfulness has prevailed in spite of the presence at a conference of those who knew the subject inside out, but just failed to say their bit at the right moment.

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

I would suggest that one of the many benefits given to the service by THE NAVAL REVIEW is the help it gives to the development of the balanced view. Sometimes one may read in it a rather extreme article but with an assurance that in a later number a friendly reasoned reply will give a better balanced view on the subject. Thus, a sounder judgment on the ever arising problems is developed. The importance of this cannot be over-estimated; the extremist, be he the man with an idea, or a critic, is not allowed to get away with it unchallenged as too often he is in literature and the Press. Not that one must ever underrate the extremist's value. If one has an idea and the courage to advance it, it is human to overstress one's strong points, leaving to another to point out the risks involved; there are always two sides to a case. Balance of mind is vital in big decisions; but if your mind is too well balanced, you are apt to be safe rather than enterprising. Few great things can be accomplished without taking risks and, if you are a Nelson, balancing them correctly. Every advanced thinker seems at the moment to be an extremist; so I hope THE NAVAL REVIEW will keep its pages open to the extreme enthusiast, while cultivating the balanced view.

It is not always that a balanced view can be gained merely by deep thought; sometimes too much thinking may unbalance the mind. Practical test and experience is frequently necessary to find the correct balance. If we look back at some of the larger problems that disturbed naval equanimity, we find that conflict of opinions led to two issues: should the new road advocated be rejected, or should we move along it slowly and cautiously ?

From the 1951 issue of the THE NAVAL REVIEW, Quarterly Journal of independent professional debate of the Royal Navy.

Monday, June 20, 2011

There are many ways to stifle the creativity and smarts of your team, just as there are lots of ways to get the most out of people. To assess your leadership style, take the survey at www.multipliersbook.com.

Diminishers

The Empire Builder

Hoards resources and underutilizes talent

The Tyrant

Creates a tense environment that suppresses people’s thinking and capabilities

The Know-It-All

Gives directives that demonstrate how much he or she knows

The Decision Maker

Makes centralized, abrupt decisions that confuse the organization

The Micro-manager

Drives results through his or her personal involvement

Multipliers

The Talent Magnet

Attracts talented people and uses them to their highest potential

The Liberator

Creates an intense environment that requires people’s best thinking and work

The Challenger

Defines an opportunity that causes people to stretch their thinking and behaviors

The Debate Maker

Drives sound decisions by cultivating rigorous debate among team members

The Investor

Gives other people ownership of results and invests in their success

Comment on this post and get a free autographed copy of Liz Wiseman's book MULTIPLIERS. (One commenter will be chosen at random to win the free book).

Sunday, June 19, 2011

"Where significance is concerned, we ought not measure our officers by where they went to college, or what their paygrade is or what their designator is, nor by their current position; they ought to be measured by the size of their thinking."

Saturday, June 18, 2011

I try very hard to get better, to learn more, to think more, to understand more and to share more. David T. Moore has captured my attention. I am digging into his book "SENSEMAKING, A Structure For An Intelligence Revolution." It's 156 pages of good reading. Having spent the majority of my life in the Intelligence Community, I care about it deeply. If you care about the IC at all, this is a book that is worth serious attention and careful reading.

Friday, June 17, 2011

Rear Admiral (lower half) William E. Leigher, who has been selected for promotion to rear admiral, will be assigned as Director of Concepts, Strategies and Integration for Information Dominance, N2/N6F, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, Washington, D.C. Leigher is currently serving as Deputy Commander, Fleet Cyber Command/Deputy Commander, TENTH Fleet, Fort Meade, Maryland.

Rear Admiral Leigher will be replacing VADM Kendall Card who was recently promoted and assigned as the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Dominance and the Director of Naval Intelligence.

Greenert has served in various fleet support and financial management positions, including deputy chief of naval operations for integration of capabilities and resources (N8); deputy commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet; chief of staff, U.S. 7th Fleet; head, Navy Programming Branch and director, Operations Division Navy Comptroller.

He is a recipient of various personal, and campaign awards including the Distinguished Service Medal (5 awards), Defense Superior Service Medal and Legion of Merit (4 awards). In 1992 he was awarded the Vice Admiral Stockdale Award for inspirational leadership. He considers those awards earned throughout his career associated with unit performance to be most satisfying and representative of naval service.

In a rather unusual move, I have heard that Captain Hospodar's decision to fire LCDR Matt Tucker has been reversed by the BCNR.

I am waiting additional facts/information.

Original NAVY TIMES story is below.

Philip Ewing - Staff writer
Wednesday Mar 4, 2009

The commanding officer of the mine countermeasures ship Devastator was relieved of command Tuesday for not “maintaining ship readiness standards,” the Navy announced.

Lt. Cmdr. Matt Tucker, who commanded the crew Persistent, was relieved by the commander of Mine Countermeasures Squadron 2, Capt. Robert Hospodar, just over three weeks after Naval Station Ingleside, Texas-based Devastator underwent a scheduled examination by the Board of Inspection and Survey (INSURV).

The chief staff officer for the squadron, Cmdr. Angel Cruz, took command of the Devastator and will stay as CO until Friday. Then he is to yield command of the ship to Lt. Cmdr. Thomas Shear, the current executive officer of the mine countermeasures ship Chief, a sibling of the Devastator.

A spokesman for Naval Mine and Anti-Submarine Warfare Command did not have information about where Tucker had been assigned after his relief.

Tucker took command of the Devastator’s crew Persistent Nov. 25, after having served as executive officer of the mine countermeasure ship Scout in Bahrain.

The first set of nominees for the annual Captain Rochefort Information Warfare (IW) Officer Distinguished Leadership Award is being reviewed by a distinguished group of Information Warfare community Captains. The purpose of the "peer nomination award" is to recognize the superior career achievement of one Information Warfare Officer each year beginning in 2011. An announcement of the winner is expected soon. Plans originally called for the selectee to be announced during the Navy's observance/commemoration of the Battle of Midway.

In the spirit of teamwork and selflessness show by Captain Joseph J. Rochefort, specific consideration is given to leadership, teamwork, operational considerations, and adherence to the principle by which he served:

“We can accomplish anything provided no one cares who gets the credit.”

Representing the best of the intelligence and cryptologic communities, Rochefort was driven but unflamboyant. Rising from the enlisted ranks, he was an outsider to the elite fraternity of officers who had graduated from the Naval Academy. He was a conventional career Sailor who had pursued a conventional career path: sea duty, engineering school, ensign's commission, more sea duty. Rochefort spent FOURTEEN years at sea !

His record of achievement in the intelligence and cryptologic communities is remarkable, yet he considered himself somewhat of a failure.

"I can offer a lot of excuses," he would later say, "but we failed in our job. An intelligence officer has one job, one task, one mission -- to tell his commander, his superior, today what the Japanese are going to do tomorrow."

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

According to Naval Network Warfare Command's retiring commander, RADM Ned Deets, the Navy is preparing for "stem to stern" inspections in cybersecurity. This will involve a regime of inspections focused specifically on IT security.

"We've never had an inspection force (for cybersecurity). We do now—nascent, but growing. We've built an inspection plan that will eventually inspect, on a three year cycle, 900 command units across the Navy. It looks a lot like a lot of the other inspection programs we have across the Navy, like INSURV and things of that nature", RADM Deets said.

Each year every one of the 900 commands should expect to be subjected to some sort of cybersecurity inspection.

"We'll do an administrative inspection to take a look at your program first (year). Second (year) will be unit-level training and advice and assistance to ensure that you're ready to operate in your unit, and third (year) will be a stem-to-stern inspection of everything associated with your networks and long-haul communications, physical security included. In the Navy, we expect what we inspect, and we have never inspected in this area before," RADM Deets continued.

"The network security posture is still not on a lot of commanders' daily reports, and it really needs to be," Admiral Greenert said. "The workforce awareness is pretty low on information assurance. We still need to go in and slap people's hands, because they want to plug things like thumb drive into our computers or they want to charge their iPads. We're not really complying yet with the existing security directives, and up to nine out of ten of the exploits that we've had have been known vulnerabilities. They could have been cut off."

RADM Deets said the Navy lacks the ability to oversee and defend its networks to the degree it would like to, in part, because there are so many of them.

"The backbone of the Navy" is how one old adage sums up the importance of the Chiefs quarters. Superior commands are especially quick to acknowledge the Chief Petty Officer's special role and contribution. The uniqueness of that role is a function both of the position the Chief occupies in the organizational structure and of the job qualifications that must be satisfied before the position is attained. Chiefs have considerable managerial and technical expertise and are the linchpin between officers and enlisted.

For there to be a strong Chiefs quarters, the Chiefs must feel that they are valued and that they have the authority and responsibility to do the job the way they think it ought to be done. In superior commands, the Chiefs feel that their special leadership role is sanctioned and appreciated by the rest of the command, especially the CO. In these commands, the Chiefs are included in all major activities, particularly planning. Their input is sought and readily given. If they believe that something won't work or that there is a better way to do it, they speak up.

Chiefs in superior commands lead by taking responsibility for their division. They motivate their subordinates, counsel them, defend them when unjustly criticized, monitor and enforce standards, give positive and negative feedback, communicate essential information, solicit input, monitor morale, and take initiative to propose new solutions and to do things before being told.

The Chiefs play a key role in the enforcement of standards. Because they are out and about, they see for themselves whether job performance and military bearing meet the Navy's and the command's requirements.

When work is done well, they offer recognition and rewards; when it is done poorly, they act to correct it. They also know the importance of modeling the kind of behavior they expect their people to display. If they expect their personnel to work long hours to get something done, they work the same hours right along with them. Their concerns extend beyond their immediate areas, however.

Chiefs in superior commands act for command-wide effectiveness, promoting the success of the unit as a whole. Although they have a strong sense of ownership and take responsibility for their division's activities, they are able to look beyond the job at hand: when other departments or divisions need assistance, chiefs in superior commands are willing to help.

The superior Chiefs quarters usually has a strong leader who plays the role of standard-bearer for the command, creates enthusiasm, offers encouragement, and drives others to excel. It is usually someone whom the other chiefs perceive as fair, who stands up for their interests and those of the crew, who listens with an open mind, and who has demonstrated a high degree of technical proficiency.

In superior commands, the Chiefs quarters functions as a tight-knit team. The Chiefs coordinate well, seek inputs from each other, help with personal problems, identify with the command's philosophy and goals, and treat each other with professional respect.

Finally, this ability to perceive larger goals and to work toward them as a team extends to their relationships with division officers. Chiefs in superior commands are sensitive to the difficulties that arise for division officers, who lack experience and technical know-how but must nevertheless take their place as leaders within the chain of command. A superior Chiefs quarters supports and advises these new officers fully and tactfully.

Monday, June 13, 2011

"When you empower your workforce to be communicators, you must understand that you won't always agree with what they say or perhaps how they say it. You can certainly set reasonable boundaries--we tell our Sailors not to disclose classified information, and we expect everyone to treat everyone else with dignity and respect. But you can't dictate everything your people say," said Admiral Gary Roughead.

By having junior officers maintain blogs and Facebook pages, communities have grown to better support one another--helping to address attrition and retention problems, the CNO said.

Note: Recall that in 2008, the Information Warfare Officer Community Manager (IWOCM) blog was shut down by RADM Ned Deets (NNWC) via Captain Will Metts (Senior IW Detailer). It may be time to bring it back!! With the CNO's support.

Now a Vice Admiral, Kendall Card is the second admiral to serve as Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Dominance and the 64th Director of Naval Intelligence (N2N6) on the OPNAV staff. He is a Naval Aviator qualified in the SH-3H SEA KING, SH-60F SEAHAWK, and the S-3A VIKING. He was also the commanding officer of the nuclear powered aircraft carrier USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN (CVN-72).

Friday, June 10, 2011

The Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (DCNO) for Information Dominance is already on the move at a blistering pace. VADM Kendall L. Card was confirmed by the Senate on 26 May 2011 and held a change of office with outgoing DCNO VADM Jack Dorsett on 1 June. Today, he has responsibility for an Information Dominance Corps of more than 40,000 Navy civilians, Sailors, officers, and Chiefs. Getting acquainted with a corps that large is going to take some time but VADM Card isn't wasting a minute. The second full day in the office found VADM Card meeting with his fellow N2N6 Flags and Senior Executive Service personnel. On Monday he visited NNWC to work on his IDWO qualifications and PQS at the executive level. On Tuesday, VADM Card checked in with CYBERFOR and NCTAMS LANT. On Thursday, he spent the day at ONI with Navy O6s and above intelligence officers and IS Master Chiefs. Wednesday was spent with Captain Don Darnell at NMITC.

He'll continue to make the rounds of the IDC and visit with ONI, Fleet Cyber Command/10th Fleet and NMOC at Stennis. He's also scheduled to visit the cryptologic training establishment at CID Corry Station in the coming month. On 17 June, he'll hold an offsite with his senior leaders. You immediately get an understanding of why folks say this is a helo guy who operates at jet speeds and altitudes. Feedback I'm getting tells me this is a guy who engages with folks at the deck plate level and really listens.

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Our Information Warfare Community Flag Officers will be having an offsite in July. They'll be discussing 'community leader' transition and implementation of the 'Captains Council', among other things. Everyone is reminded (as I was) that they are welcome to contact the 'community leader', or any of the IW community flag officers/SESs with any questions, recommendations, etc.

Leaders have to lead by example and be part of engaging a wide array of audiences, and they must approach it with eagerness – not defensiveness or trepidation. The key to success as a leader is to recognize that there is an opportunity – indeed an obligation – to listen to your people, to add another dimension to your awareness.

Listening doesn't just make for better leaders, it makes for better organizations. Your people expand your entire organization's ability to listen to each other and others outside the organization, but only if you empower them to do so.

When talking about transparency, most organizations only think about being more clear and open to others who are looking in. The more valuable transparency also looks outward, and allows the world outside the organization to be more open to those within the organization. If you empower those you lead to listen, you don't have a one-way mirror where others can see in to your organization but you can't see out – you let your people be your open window to the world. In doing so, you stand to benefit from perspectives of those outside your immediate circle. Many leaders already do this when we seek alternative analyses as input to our decision-making, presumably because we are conscious of how complex the issues are. We are somehow less aware – or too comfortable with what we think we know – about our institution's core competencies, when by opening our aperture on daily activities we might gain from allowing the people we lead to help us connect to the communities we serve.

The final challenge is that as a leader, especially leaders in public service, now more than ever, you have to guard against the temptation of making it about you. Egos are certainly not new to leaders – even some generals and some admirals have been known to have them – but new social media tools, the power of networks, and the reach of the hubs within those networks, can allow leaders to take on almost celebrity status.

Many of our organizations have focused on leaders as communicators. Now, we have the chance to be leaders of communicators. If we recognize the opportunities inherent in this reality, we will be more effective as leaders… our organization will more skillfully inform… and our people will be the key to our communication success, just as they are the key to our success in all things.

The CNO's entire speech at the Strategic Communications Summit is HERE. Well worth reading.

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

Commander Michael Varney, Commanding Officer of USS CONNECTICUT (SSN-22) was fired on 6 June 2011 following an investigation and award of Non-Judicial Punishment (NJP).

Varney was awarded NJP for violations of UCMJ Article 92, violation of a lawful general order; Article 107, making a false official statement and Article 134, wrongful interference in an adverse administrative proceeding.

Varney had commanded the SEAWOLF-class attack submarine since February 2009.

Less than a year prior to the Battle of Midway, retired Rear Admiral Donald "Mac" Showers had been commissioned on Sept. 12, 1941 as an Ensign. Soon after his commissioning, he received orders to join Pearl Harbor's code breakers. One of very few code breakers, "Mac" was assigned to Station Hypo.Commander Joseph John Rochefort was the Station Hypo officer in charge. Rochefort hand-picked many of Hypo's augmentees, and it contained the Navy's best cryptanalysts, traffic analysts, and linguists. By the spring of 1942, Rochefort's staff, which included Showers, were making positive strides toward deciphering the Japanese Navy's crucial next move.

About that time, Japanese intercepts began to make references to a pending operation in which the objective was designated as "AF", but not everyone was convinced. Showers was a key witness to the history, in fact the conversation regarding the significance of "AF" between Rochefort and Cmdr. Jasper Holmes took place at his desk. Both Rochefort and Holmes knew they needed to convince Admiral Chester Nimitz and Washington that the Japanese may be targeting Midway Island. Both believed that "AF" signified Midway Island based upon his staff's earlier deductions that the "A" designators were assigned to locations in the Hawaiian Islands.

Rochefort's staff assisted in drafting a naval message, in the clear, indicating that Midway Island's water distillation plant had suffered serious damage and that fresh water was needed. Shortly after the transmission, an intercepted Japanese intelligence report indicated that "AF" was short of water - which satisfactorily alleviated any doubt.

Due to the cryptologic achievements of Rochefort and his staff, including Showers, the cryptologic and intelligence teams enabled Nimitz to know when the attack on Midway Island would commence. Armed with this crucial information, he was able to get his severely outgunned, but determined force in position in time.

Sunday, June 5, 2011

The tools of the staff officer are a piece of paper and a pencil with an eraser. If a mistake is made, it can always be erased and changed. If the operator errs, he wears the mistake around his neck; it cannot be erased. Everyone sees it.

Saturday, June 4, 2011

Navy SEAL Roy Boehm, enlisted as a Navy diver at age 17 and served in almost every major battle of the Pacific theater during World War II. Roy Boehm later designed and led a commando unit that became the Navy SEALs. He was the first officer in charge of SEAL Team TWO.

“In his efforts to get his men the equipment they needed, Boehm was nearly court-martialed at one point for modifying official gear and buying the weapons from commercial sources. White House intervention helped keep him out of jail."

In 1962, Boehm was called to Washington to brief President John F. Kennedy on the progress of the Navy's new commando unit. When President Kennedy walked in, the first thing Boehm said was, ‘Well, Mr. President, I didn't vote for you, but I'd die for you.’ And after a long pause, Kennedy said, ‘Well, we need more guys like that.’" And, the Navy has them. We still call them SEALS.

Roy Boehm passed away quietly on December 30, 2008. He was 84.

Not satisfied with that Navy Achievement Medal you got? Roy Boehm designed and implemented the Navy's first counterinsurgency course. He was awarded the Navy Achievement Medal for his efforts. Match that before you complain again.

"Although my part in the Battle of Midway was very small, I appreciate this opportunity to relate to you some of the more important achievements of my contemporary naval cryptologists that made the success of the Battle of Midway possible. As a current member of the Naval Security Group, you can take pride in the great accomplishments of your predecessors, not only related to the Battle of Midway but long before World War II as well as throughout World War II.

There are not many naval cryptologic veterans alive today that were involved in providing the communications intelligence information that gave our inferior forces on land, sea and especially in the air the equalizer of knowing the composition of enemy forces, and when and where those huge Japanese forces would attack U.S. territory under Admiral Yamamoto’s grandiose invasion plan. This crucial communications intelligence information, when combined with the heroic actions of fighting forces under the brilliant command of Admiral Nimitz, led to the great U.S. victory in the Battle of Midway.

We should keep in mind that intelligence itself does not win battles. However, I believe the lesson of the Battle of Midway is that good, solid intelligence can make the difference between winning and losing a crucial battle for our country. I hope you will keep this in mind in the future.

What was the genesis of the naval cryptologic success at the Battle of Midway? So much was involved in building up dedicated experts in all the various fields of cryptology that it is impossible to point to one single source. Credit must be given to many individuals who operated under difficult conditions, extremely limited budgets, and poor promotional opportunities. This relatively tiny group of dedicated individuals accomplished much in their efforts over the years to keep abreast of the growing force of the Japanese navy and their ever increasing communications security precautions. With the Japanese instigation of war with the U.S., this cadre of technical experts made it relatively easy to expand into a large organization and to immediately provide increasingly vital intelligence to not only U.S. Navy operational forces but also to U.S. Army and Allied forces in the Southwest Pacific and Indian Ocean areas."

Thursday, June 2, 2011

For starters,great leaders must have vision – the ability to get your eyes off your shoelaces at every level of rank and responsibility, and see beyond the day-to-day tasks and problems. To be able to look beyond tomorrow and discern a world of possibilities and potential. How do you take any outfit to a higher level of excellence? You must see what others do not or cannot, and then be prepared to act on your vision.

An additional quality necessary for leadership is deep conviction. True leadership is a fire in the mind that transforms all who feel its warmth, that transfixes all who see its shining light in the eyes of a man or woman. It is a strength of purpose and belief in a cause that reaches out to others, touches their hearts, and makes them eager to follow.

Self-confidence is still another quality of leadership. Not the chest-thumping, strutting egotism we see and read about all the time. Rather, it is the quiet self-assurance that allows a leader to give others both real responsibility and real credit for success. The ability to stand in the shadow and let others receive attention and accolades. A leader is able to make decisions but then delegate and trust others to make things happen. This doesn’t mean turning your back after making a decision and hoping for the best. It does mean trusting in people at the same time you hold them accountable. The bottom line: a self-confident leader doesn’t cast such a large shadow that no one else can grow.

A further quality of leadership is courage: not just the physical courage of the seas, of the skies and of the trenches, but moral courage. The courage to chart a new course; the courage to do what is right and not just what is popular; the courage to stand alone; the courage to act; the courage as a military officer to “speak truth to power.”

In most academic curricula today, and in most business, government, and military training programs, there is great emphasis on team-building, on working together, on building consensus, on group dynamics. You have learned a lot about that. But, for everyone who would become a leader, the time will inevitably come when you must stand alone. When alone you must say, “This is wrong” or “I disagree with all of you and, because I have the responsibility, this is what we will do.” Don’t kid yourself – that takes real courage.

Another essential quality of leadership is integrity. Without this, real leadership is not possible. Nowadays, it seems like integrity – or honor or character – is kind of quaint, a curious, old-fashioned notion. We read of too many successful and intelligent people in and out of government who succumb to the easy wrong rather than the hard right – whether from inattention or a sense of entitlement, the notion that rules are not for them. But for a real leader, personal virtues – self-reliance, self control, honor, truthfulness, morality – are absolute. These are the building blocks of character, of integrity – and only on that foundation can real leadership be built.

A final quality of real leadership, I believe, is simply common decency: treating those around you – and, above all, your subordinates – with fairness and respect. An acid test of leadership is how you treat those you outrank, or as President Truman once said, “how you treat those who can’t talk back.”

The true measure of leadership is how you react when the wind leaves your sails,

when the tide turns against you.

Secretary Gates' Commencement address to the 2011 Class of the United States Naval Academy is HERE.

Wednesday, June 1, 2011

The EP-3E Airborne Reconnaissance Integrated Electronic System (ARIES) II is the Navy's only land-based signals intelligence (SIGINT) reconnaissance aircraft and provides fleet and theater commanders with near real-time tactical SIGINT. With sensitive receivers and high-gain dish antennas, the EP-3E exploits a wide range of electronic emissions from deep within targeted territory and can be deployed from a variety of locations based on its commonalities with the P-3 Orion aircraft.

Vice Admiral Kendall L. Card

and Director of Naval Intelligence (DNI)

Vice Admiral Card is a native of Fort Stockton, Texas. He earned a Bachelors of Science in Mechanical Engineering from Vanderbilt University in December 1977 and holds a Master’s degree in National Security and Strategic Studies from U.S. Naval War College. From 1979 to 2006, Card served in various operational tours at sea, flying from the decks of USS Forrestal (CV 59), USS America (CV 66), USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN 71), USS Saratoga (CV 60), and USS Enterprise (CVN 65). He commanded Helicopter Antisubmarine Squadron 15, USS Ranier (AOE 7) and USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72). Under his command Abraham Lincoln participated in Operations Enduring Freedom, Southern Watch, and Iraqi Freedom as part of a record setting 9.5 month deployment as well as Operation Unified Assistance in support of the Tsunami relief efforts in Sumatra, Indonesia. Card was selected for flag officer in 2006. As a flag officer he has served as director, Command Control Systems, North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command J6; commander, task forces 51/58/59/151/158, Manama, Bahrain; commander, Expeditionary Strike Group Three, San Diego, Calif. He most recently served as Director of Concepts, Strategies, and Integration (N2/N6F) for Information Dominance (OPNAV N2/N6). He was confirmed by the Senate on 26 May 2011 and assumed duties as DCNO for Information Dominance on 1 June 2011. Card has accumulated over 3,900 flight hours in the SH-3H Sea King, SH-60F Seahawk, and the S-3A Viking aircraft. His personal decorations include the Defense Superior Service Medal, Legion of Merit (three awards), Bronze Star and various personal, service and campaign awards.